Friday, October 09, 2020






"That's A Dictator": Foreign Election Experts Say Trump Is Engaging In Voter Suppression And Intimidation


“I’ve never thought in my eight years of working in this industry, that I would be worried about election violence in the US in this day and age,” one former election observer said, “but now I wouldn’t put it past us.”

David Mack BuzzFeed News Reporter
Posted on October 6, 2020

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images
President Donald J. Trump stands on the Truman Balcony at the White House after receiving treatments for the coronavirus at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Monday.


In recent years, international election observers have monitored tumultuous votes in countries like Afghanistan, Ukraine, and Russia. This year, they're turning their attention back again to the US, a place not normally considered a democracy in danger but looking increasingly chaotic.

Members of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) began flying into Washington, DC, last week to prepare for Election Day. But just hours after roughly a dozen OSCE experts officially began working on Sept. 29, the US witnessed one of the ugliest debates in its history — peppered with claims from the sitting president that the election results will be fraudulent unless he wins.

That was even before the president was rushed to hospital on Friday, having contracted a deadly virus, and details of his health were hidden from the public, further fueling the uncertainty heading into the contentious vote.

Over the course of 90 minutes during last week’s debate, President Donald Trump heckled and lied with abandon. He declined to denounce white supremacists. He mocked the drug addiction of the living son of opponent Joe Biden as the former vice president discussed his dead son. He framed the death of a suspected shooter in Portland, Oregon, as an extrajudicial killing, boasting he had sent in US Marshals who “took care of business.” And he once again sought to undermine public faith in the integrity of the election by falsely claiming there’s “going to be a fraud like you’ve never seen.”

“I’m urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully, because that’s what has to happen,” Trump said, declining once again to commit to a peaceful transfer of power.

Such language is “usually something that’s criticized by election observers around the world,” said Susan Hyde, a University of California, Berkeley, political science professor who studies election observers and who previously worked as one in seven countries. “I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that would have caught their attention.”

“That’s a dictator,” said one American who previously monitored elections across three continents but who asked not to be named because she didn’t want to be seen to be speaking for her current employer.

“That’s what we see in African countries consistently,” she said, going on to talk specifically about Zimbabwe.



“I’ve never thought in my eight years of working in this industry, that I would be worried about election violence in the US in this day and age,” she added, “but now I wouldn’t put it past us.”

Katya Andrusz, a spokesperson for the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, declined to comment on the current US election, stressing that the organization’s observers, who have been monitoring US elections for 20 years, always remain politically neutral.

Speaking about democracy more broadly, though, she underscored the importance of public confidence in the vote.

"In any country, trust in the process is absolutely vital and if there is anything that’s undermining trust, it’s not healthy for a democracy,” Andrusz said. “A big part of democratic elections is the trust in them, that the system works, that your vote counts.

“If people don’t believe that’s the case, it can weaken public confidence in the democratic process itself.”

Win Mcnamee / Getty Images
A member of the White House cleaning staff sanitizes the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on Monday.


Of course, the events of the last few days surrounding the coronavirus outbreak inside the White House have thrown yet another spanner into a tumultuous election season. With doctors warning Trump may still experience severe symptoms of COVID-19 in the days to come, there remains speculation of what might happen if he should die or become too ill to continue in the election — chatter Trump sought to squash on Monday night with a publicized return to the White House from his hospital bed designed to show him as every bit the Strongman leader.

In a stunt that Atlantic writer and democracy historian Anne Applebaum compared to Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, Trump stood on the balcony of the White House while still infected, removed his mask, and saluted for the cameras. A White House video of the event, set to booming orchestral music befitting an action film, was released within the hour.

“Anyone hailing from an authoritarian country is horrified by that Trump video, as should be anyone who values democracy over demagoguery,” said Garry Kasparov — the Russian chess grandmaster, chairman of the Human Rights Foundation and Renew Democracy Initiative — on Twitter. “The staging, boasting, the disregard for people’s lives. He won’t change and he must go.”

Interest in the US election around the world remains feverish, with international broadcasters airing last week’s debate live (causing translators to struggle) and foreign news sites often leading with the latest political developments.

While international attention is high, global opinions of the US are falling to low levels. A September Pew Research Center survey of 13 nations found that in several countries, the number of people with a positive view of the US was lower than at any point in their almost two decades of polling. The decline is driven in part by perceptions of the Trump administration’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, but also by views of Trump himself. Fewer than 1 in 10 Belgians, for example, have confidence that the US president will do the right thing.

As the president continues to upend democratic norms and undermine public faith in the integrity of the election, experts told BuzzFeed News they fear not only for the US image abroad, but for the US itself.

“Especially from a country that has been promoting election observation, promoting democracy, been a beacon of democracy around the world and thought it was in a position to send observers to other countries to instruct them in the right ways to run elections, it’s discouraging,” said Judith Kelley, the dean of the Duke Sanford School of Public Policy, who has studied such observers extensively. “It’s very, very discouraging.”

Kelly said Trump’s comments at the debate would likely alarm election observers, who would see his attempts to undermine public confidence in the election as a form of voter suppression.

“I also think that Trump was indirectly urging his supporters to engage in voter intimidation and he was indirectly himself engaging in voter suppression by simply discouraging people from believing that this election would matter, that their ballot would be counted,” she said. “Why show up if you think your vote wouldn’t count?”

The president’s debate comments came less than a week after the Trump campaign released a video in which his son Donald Trump Jr. called for supporters to volunteer as partisan election observers, which are permitted under the law. Except Trump Jr. framed his callout in highly militaristic terms. “We need every able-bodied man and woman to join Army for Trump’s election security operation,” he said, calling for people to “defend” their ballots and “enlist.”

“President Trump is going to win. Don’t let them steal it,” Trump Jr. said.

A week before that, supporters of the president disrupted early voting at a site in Virginia, chanting slogans. Some voters and election workers felt intimidated by the group and had to be provided escorts, according to officials.

“You can have voter intimidation without guns,” said John Campbell, who lives in nearby Alexandria and who, as US ambassador to Nigeria, oversaw the team of American diplomats who monitored that country’s 2007 election.

Campbell noted that in Nigeria it is not uncommon for gangs of political supporters to try to intimidate one another. “It’s one of the reasons why elections are very often so violent,” he said, “particularly in the run-up.”

Eric Bjornlund— the board chair of the Election Reformers Network and president of Democracy International, which consults internationally on issues of governance and politics — told BuzzFeed News that “armed politically affiliated gangs” were a feature in some South Asian countries, such as Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan.

“There’s a huge tradition of these armed thugs that are affiliated with parties that go around and try to prevent people from voting,” he said. “They would say they’re providing security.”

Bjornlund said he now fears their emergence in the US political arena.

"It’s pretty likely that in another country, if people who are not official police or security forces or rather militia or self-appointed election monitors that are armed and going to polling places, it’s pretty clear we would have a problem with that as the international community and we would call it out,” he said.

Bryan Woolston / Reuters
A Trump supporter stands with far-right activists and self-described militia members during a rally on the day of the Kentucky Derby horse race in Louisville on Sept. 5.


Kelley, the Duke Sanford dean, said it is possible that some Trump supporters may see his comments as a call to arms, given the presence over the summer of armed, right-wing, self-described militias at political demonstrations. This included the Proud Boys group, whom Trump told at the debate to “stand by” and whose members have been charged with violent offenses at such protests.

Trump’s illness and hospitalization for COVID-19 was also seen by Trump supporters who believe in the QAnon mass delusion as a signal from Trump that he was being sequestered in a safe place so that masses of Democratic politicians, beginning with Hillary Clinton, could be arrested, and that they should prepare for a battle against his political opponents.

Amnesty International USA on Tuesday put out what they said was unprecedented advisory, warning of the threat of gun violence and armed voter intimidation at the polls. Georgetown Law School experts have even prepared 50 fact sheets — one for each state — “explaining the laws barring unauthorized private militia groups and what to do if groups of armed individuals are near a polling place or voter registration drive.”

Even if those self-described militias don’t actually materialize on Election Day, if many voters fear that they could, that is a form of voter suppression, Kelley said.

“You may have voters saying, ‘I don’t feel safe going to the polls. I don’t know who is going to be there.’ And that’s classic voter intimidation,” Kelley said. “And he’s indirectly urging his supporters to engage in that kind of conduct and that’s worrisome.”

Robert Lloyd, the dean of Palm Beach Atlantic University’s school of arts and sciences and who worked as an elections observer in Nigeria, Libera, and Mozambique in the 1990s and 2000s, urged caution. He said any individual incidents of intimidation at polling places should be taken seriously but also had to be put into perspective nationally.

“In terms of [supporters] yelling and screaming at people, that would not be considered appropriate. Can you stop it in a country of 330 million people? Probably not,” he said. “That’s not to dismiss it, but you have to look at the overall picture.”

Still, Lloyd said, his work monitoring heated elections in Africa had taught him leaders should be careful not to use inflammatory language, because ”others may interpret it in ways they don’t mean.”

Ty Wright / Getty Images
A person wearing a mask and a face shield stands in line waiting to register for early voting outside of the Franklin County Board of Elections Office on Tuesday in Columbus, Ohio.


In another sign of just how unprecedented this election is, the Carter Center, the nongovernmental organization founded by former president Jimmy Carter that monitors elections around the world, is for the first time in its 30-year history turning its attention to the US.

The nonpartisan group announced in August that they were preparing an initiative, which may yet include some election observation, because they feared US democracy was “backsliding.”

“We’ve often thought about this and knew the US could improve or benefit from observation,” Carter Center Director of Democracy David Carroll told BuzzFeed News, “but we never really thought seriously we’d be asked in a serious way to observe in the US as a country that would need observation.”

Carroll said the last five years have seen a marked increase in political polarization and doubts about the credibility of the electoral process in the US. “The sense that people think the election might be stolen, that’s not something that was a widespread concern 20 years ago in the US,” he said. “It’s much more like countries where we work internationally.”

The unnamed former elections observer who spoke with BuzzFeed News cited Trump’s refusal to commit to a peaceful transfer of power as a particularly worrying sign for US democracy and one that would tarnish America abroad.

“If America uses the same formula that we use overseas to see what countries are backsliding in their democracy,” she said, “then we are backsliding fast.”

In a report prepared ahead of their visit, the OSCE group mentioned their “concerns over potential use of intolerant rhetoric during the campaign, including inflammatory speech targeting ethnic and racial minorities coming from high level officials.”

It comes two years after the last crop of OSCE observers wrote a report on the 2018 US midterm elections, in which they found that rhetoric used in that campaign to be “often divisive, confrontational and intolerant, with much of it emanating from the national level.”

They recommended that all candidates and supporters refrain from language that incites hostility, discrimination, or violence.

On Wednesday last week, the morning after watching the debate, the president’s performance had done little to reassure Kelley, the Duke Sanford dean, that Trump’s confrontational rhetoric would diminish.

“We’re all getting tired of the word ‘unprecedented,’” she said. “You can only use it so many times before it’s no longer unprecedented.”
Stephanie M. Lee · Oct. 5, 2020
Stephanie K. Baer · Oct. 1, 2020
Stephanie K. Baer · Sept. 30, 2020


David Mack is a deputy director of breaking news for BuzzFeed News and is based in New York.



Trump steel tariffs bring job losses to swing state Michigan

By Rajesh Kumar Singh

CHICAGO(Reuters) - President Donald Trump promised a new dawn for the struggling U.S. steel industry in 2016, and the lure of new jobs in Midwestern states including Michigan helped him eke out a surprise election win.



FILE PHOTO: An entrance to the U.S. Steel Great Lakes Works plant is seen in Ecorse, Michigan, U.S., September 24, 2019. Picture taken September 24, 2019. REUTERS/Rebecca Cook/File Photo

Four years later, Great Lakes Works - once among the state’s largest steel plants - has shut down steelmaking operations and put 1,250 workers out of a job. A year before the June layoffs, plant owner United States Steel Corp called off a plan to invest $600 million in upgrades amid deteriorating market conditions.

Trump’s strategy centered on shielding U.S. steel mills from foreign competition with a 25% tariff imposed in March 2018. He also promised to boost steel demand through major investments in roads, bridges and other infrastructure.

But higher steel prices resulting from the tariffs dented demand from the Michigan-based U.S. auto industry and other steel consumers. And the Trump administration has never followed through on an infrastructure plan.

Michigan’s heavy reliance on the steel and auto industries puts Trump’s trade policy in sharp focus ahead of the Nov. 3 presidential election in this battleground state. Democrats say they aim to recapture the votes of blue-collar workers they lost to Trump four years ago - one key factor in his victory over Hillary Clinton. Trump won Michigan by less than one percent of the statewide vote total. The competition for the votes of often-unionized manufacturing workers - who historically have voted Democratic - will be just as fierce in the battleground states of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, political analysts say.

Biden leads Trump in Michigan by 8 percentage points, according to a Reuters/Ipsos state opinion poll of likely voters conducted from Sept. 29 - Oct. 6, widening his lead from a few weeks earlier.

Nationally, the steel industry has been shedding jobs for the past year - since before the wider economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic - and now employs 1,900 fewer workers than it did when Trump took office, according to U.S. Labor Department data. (For a graphic on steel jobs, click tmsnrt.rs/2SRIEaF)

While the tariffs failed to boost overall steel employment, economists say they created higher costs for major steel consumers - killing jobs at companies including Detroit-based automakers General Motors Co and Ford Motor Co. Nationally, steel and aluminum tariffs resulted in at least 75,000 job losses in metal-using industries by the end of last year, according to an analysis by Lydia Cox, a Ph.D. candidate in economics at Harvard University, and Kadee Russ, an economics professor at the University of California, Davis. In all, they estimated, the trade war had caused a net loss of 175,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs by mid-2019.


In Michigan, steelmakers have served layoff notices to nearly 2,000 workers since the tariff took effect, according to a Reuters analysis of the notices steel companies filed with the state. The state’s primary metals manufacturing industry, which includes iron and steel mills, employed about 7,300 fewer workers in August than in March 2018, when Trump announced metal tariffs, according to data from Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

The steel-industry setbacks account for just a fraction of the job losses in Michigan’s manufacturing sector - which now employs 55,100 fewer workers than it did when Trump took office in January 2017, U.S. Labor Department data shows. The state’s automotive industry accounted for 35% of the manufacturing job losses, according to the St. Louis Fed.

Whether such statistics will change swing-state voters’ minds remains to be seen. Bill Wischman, a financial manager at a Ford manufacturing facility in Plymouth, Michigan, says Trump has done more to protect U.S. manufacturing than any of his predecessors.

“He has given a whole-hearted effort,” said Wischman, 51, a Republican who voted for Trump in 2016.

Bob Kemper, grievance committee chairman at Great Lakes Works’ chapter of the United Steelworkers (USW) Union, put the blame squarely on Trump for the job losses.

“I don’t see any policy that helped us,” said Kemper, who is backing Biden. “We are losing our damn jobs here.”

The 1.2 million-member United Steelworkers (USW) Union, which represents U.S. manufacturing workers in many industries, supported Clinton in the last election and will again back the Democrat this time. Kemper acknowledged that many of his co-workers voted for Trump in 2016 but says that support has diminished along with the fortunes of Michigan’s steel industry.

Trump made similar 2016 campaign promises to revive the ailing coal industry by rolling back environmental regulations. But that industry’s employment has dropped 9% since 2016, to about 46,000, as 66 coal plants - nearly a fifth of the U.S. total - have closed. The economic losses come despite the administration’s moves to ease restrictions including limits on carbon emissions and dumping coal waste into streams.

The Republican party in Michigan did not respond to requests for comment. White House Trade and Manufacturing Policy Director Peter Navarro did not answer questions from Reuters on the data showing job losses in steel and manufacturing.

When U.S. Steel idled Great Lakes Works, which primarily serves the automotive industry, it cited weak demand, lower steel prices and a new corporate strategy to invest in more cost-efficient technology. In May, Cleveland-Cliffs Inc said it was closing its hot strip steel mill and some other operations in the Detroit area and laying off 343 workers. It cited “rapidly deteriorating business conditions.”

A Cleveland-Cliffs spokeswoman did not answer questions about the impact of Trump’s trade policy on its business.

U.S. Steel defends Trump’s tariffs. Company spokeswoman Meghan Cox said the policy helps “ensure the strength of America’s steelmaking capacity during this pandemic.”

The firm’s shares have plunged about 82% since the beginning of March 2018 - the month Trump announced steel tariffs - compared with a 28% increase in the S&P 500 during the same period. U.S. steel prices are now 33% below their peak in May 2018 but remain 21% higher than the global market price because of tariffs - a gap that hurts the competitiveness of U.S. companies who fashion products from domestic steel.

“No matter what the tariff is, you cannot sell something if there is limited demand,” said Ned Hill, a professor of economic development at the Ohio State University.


‘THRIVING’ ENTERPRISE

Trump said at a Pennsylvania rally in August last year - as steel companies were grappling with falling demand and prices - that his tariff has turned a “dead” business into a “thriving” enterprise.

The tariffs did initially benefit companies including U.S. Steel and Nucor by limiting competition and boosting prices. In late 2018, U.S. Steel workers secured a cumulative 14% wage increase over a four-year period.

The tariffs also led to investment, said Jeff Ferry, chief economist at the Coalition for a Prosperous America, a bipartisan trade group. Older coal-fired plants such as Great Lakes Works closed because of outdated technology, he said.

“We are not doing this to save individual jobs” in the short term, Ferry said of the tariffs. “If you grow the industries, in the long term, headcount will grow.”

That’s little comfort to the workers laid off from Great Lakes Works, who have found it harder to get new jobs amid the pandemic, Kemper said. The twin cities of Ecorse and River Rouge - which depended heavily on tax revenue from the plant - are also hurting, the cities’ mayors said. Ecorse used to collect up to $6 million in property taxes from the mill - or half its revenue, said Mayor Lamar Indwell, a Democrat.

Many Democrats have supported steel tariffs. The Biden campaign did not respond to a request for comment on its steel trade policy. In a statement to USW in May, Biden said steel tariffs would remain until a global solution to limit excess production - largely in China - can be negotiated.

USW also supports tariffs but says the Trump administration undermined the policy by granting requests from steel-using U.S. manufacturers to exempt their imports - eliminating the advantage for domestic steel.

TARIFF HITS MICHIGAN AUTO FIRMS

The tariffs had a profound impact on steel consumers, industry experts say. All three Detroit automakers - General Motors, Ford and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV - have closed a plant in Michigan since January 2018, according to Kristin Dziczek, vice president of industry, labor and economics at the Center for Automotive Research. Both General Motors and Ford reported $1 billion each in increased steel cost in 2018.

GM declined to comment on the tariffs’ impact. A Ford spokeswoman said the automaker faced higher raw material costs in 2018 because it buys 95% of its steel from domestic suppliers. While raw steel prices have since come down, Ford’s manufacturing costs are still elevated because of U.S. tariffs on Chinese-made auto parts, she said. Retaliatory tariffs from China have also cut Ford’s vehicle exports to that country.

Companies further down the auto supply chain have also felt the impact of Trump’s trade policy.

Jeff Aznavorian, head of Michigan-based Clips & Clamps Industries, buys steel from U.S. mills to make metal and tool parts for Japanese and Detroit-based automakers. He said his company has lost contracts worth up to $3.6 million in the past two years. Competitors making parts in Canada and Mexico now have an advantage, he said, because steel costs have been lower in those countries.

Aznavorian said he may move some of his business overseas.

“I need to be in a place where I can buy raw material at a competitive price,” he said.

Reporting by Rajesh Kumar Singh; additional reporting by Timothy Gardner; editing by Caroline Stauffer and Brian Thevenot





AXIOS SurveyMonkey poll: VP debate

The poll found that a majority of Americans would trust Harris rather than Pence (54%-44%) to handle the federal response to the coronavirus, even though Pence is the head of the coronavirus task force.

  • That sentiment was strongest among urban residents, who preferred Harris over Pence 70%-28%, while suburban residents gave Harris a smaller edge, 54%-45%.
  • Rural Americans preferred Pence, 40%-57%



https://www.axios.com/axios-surveymonkey-poll-vice-presidential-debate-23cb74dc-1f45-4dad-8215-3d284971bf5b.html

Exclusive: Tech coalition opposes Trump 
anti-racism training ban

Ashley Gold


Illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios

A group of 11 technology, software and advertising organizations is calling on the Trump administration to rescind an executive order intended to stop federal agencies and contractors from conducting anti-racism trainings.

 

 
Catch up quick: 
The White House order describes its goal as "to combat offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating," but its practical result is to ban diversity and inclusion programs, and critics have argued it will undermine progress toward reducing systemic racism in business, education and government.

What they're saying: The letter sent Thursday to the Office of Management and Budget and the U.S. Department of Labor, organized by tech trade group the Information Technology Industry Council, is also signed by the Alliance for Digital Innovation, the American Association of Advertising Agencies, BSA | The Software Alliance, the Cybersecurity Coalition, the Entertainment Software Association, Internet Association, TechNet, NCTA - The Internet and Television Association, XR Association and the HR Policy Association.
The groups, which represent thousands of government contractors, say in the letter they will be directly affected by the executive order's requirements to restrict existing diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

"This EO would undo progress made toward promoting racial equity and ensuring American businesses can attract the diverse talent they need to remain best-in-class,” the letter says.
“The EO appears to restrict certain types of training programs that seek to combat race or sex stereotyping. We simply do not agree that there is anything divisive about providing information that encourages our employees to treat all of their colleagues equally and with respect," the groups write.

What's happening: On Tuesday, Microsoft revealed the Labor Department was probing the company to determine whether its goal of increasing Black representation constitutes racial discrimination.

The big picture: Silicon Valley firms remain overwhelmingly white, and tech companies have been pledging to become more diverse.
IBM to break up 109-year old company to focus on cloud growth

By Munsif Vengattil


(Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp is splitting itself into two public companies, capping a years-long effort by the world’s first big computing firm to diversify away from its legacy businesses to focus on high-margin cloud computing.

IBM will list its IT infrastructure services unit, which provides technical support for 4,600 clients in 115 countries and has a backlog of $60 billion, as a separate company with a new name by the end of 2021.

The new company will have 90,000 employees and its leadership structure will be decided in a few months, Chief Financial Officer James Kavanaugh told Reuters.

IBM, which currently has more than 352,000 workers, said it expects to record nearly $5 billion in expenses related to the separation and operational changes.

Investors cheered the surprise move by Chief Executive Officer Arvind Krishna, the key architect behind IBM’s $34 billion acquisition of cloud company Red Hat last year, sending the company’s shares up 7%.

“We divested networking back in the ‘90s, we divested PCs back in the 2000s, we divested semiconductors about five years ago because all of them didn’t necessarily play into the integrated value proposition,” Krishna said on a call with analysts.


BIG BLUE’S NEW FOCUS

In a blog, Krishna called the move a “significant shift” in the 109-year-old company’s business model.

“IBM is essentially getting rid of a shrinking, low-margin operation given the cannibalizing impact of automation and cloud, masking stronger growth for the rest of the operation,” Wedbush Securities analyst Moshe Katri said.

IBM, which has sought to make up for slowing software sales and seasonal demand for its mainframe servers, said it would now focus on open hybrid cloud and AI solutions that will account for more than half of its recurring revenues.

Krishna, who replaced Ginni Rometty as CEO in April, said IBM’s software and solutions portfolio would account for the majority of company revenue after the separation.

The company also said it expects third-quarter revenue of $17.6 billion and an adjusted profit per share of $2.58, roughly in line with Street estimates.


Reporting by Munsif Vengattil in Bengaluru; Editing by Ramakrishnan M.

House Democrats tackle Big Tech "monopolies"


Ashley Gold, Kyle Daly, Scott Rosenberg

Illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios


The House Judiciary Committee says Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google are monopolies — but its new plan to rein in their power won't change anything overnight. Instead, Democratic lawmakers propose to rewrite American antitrust law in order to restructure the U.S.'s most successful and powerful industry over time.

The big picture: The report is a long pass down the field of the tech industry's unfolding conflicts. It could be game-changing — but it also might never get completed.

Driving the news: The report, which runs more than 450 pages, proposes broad updates to antitrust law, including:
limiting companies' ability to compete unfairly against third parties on their own platforms by either requiring online marketplaces to be independently run businesses or establishing rules for how such marketplaces can be organized;
blocking online platforms from giving themselves preferential treatment or playing favorites with other content providers;
requiring social networks to be interoperable so that people can communicate across platforms and carry their data over from one platform to another;
directing antitrust enforcers to assume that an acquisition by a dominant tech firm is anticompetitive unless proven otherwise; and
allowing news publishers to team up to negotiate against tech platforms looking to carry their content.

Committee investigators spent 16 months reviewing mountains of emails, memos and other evidence to reach these conclusions about the companies:
Amazon: The internet retail giant achieved its dominant position in part through acquiring competitors; has a monopoly over and mistreats third-party sellers; and has created a conflict of interest through its double role as an operator of its marketplace and also a seller there.
Apple: The report says Apple exerts monopoly power over software distribution to more than half the mobile devices in the U.S. It accuses the company of exploiting rivals by levying commissions and fees and copying apps, and says Apple gives preference to its own apps and services.
Facebook: The social media network has monopoly power in the social networking space, the report finds, and takes a "copy, acquire, kill" approach to would-be rivals such as WhatsApp and Instagram, both of which it bought in the early 2010s.
Google: The search engine has a monopoly in the general online search and search advertising markets, according to the report, maintaining its position through anticompetitive tactics such as undermining vertical search providers and acquiring rivals.

What they're saying: "To put it simply, companies that once were scrappy, underdog startups that challenged the status quo have become the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons," write the authors of the report.

The other side: The companies all deny that they hold monopoly positions or that their practices and acquisitions violate antitrust law, and argue that the tech industry remains healthily competitive.

Why it matters: Responsibility for enforcing antitrust law lies with prosecutors at Justice and the states and with federal agencies, not with Congress. But if Democrats take the White House and the Senate in November, they could use this report as a blueprint for longer-term legislative and enforcement changes to limit tech giants' power.

Republicans on the committee offered two rival reports, focusing more on complaints of conservative bias on the part of social media platforms than on antitrust concerns, which their business-friendly party has a long tradition of discounting.

Our thought bubble: "Breaking up big tech" has been a longtime rallying cry among tech critics. Although the report offers potential rationales for unwinding acquisitions like Facebook's purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp, such outcomes remain unlikely — and would ultimately have to come from a court.

Yes, but: Many of tech's sharpest critics are enthusiastic about the report anyway. That's partly because they agree with so much of it. But it's also because they see it as a road map toward a healthier, less centralized industry.

What's next: Later this week or next week, the Justice Department is expected to file its long-gestating lawsuit against Google — kicking off tech's first major antitrust fight in two decades.

Congress says Big Tech wields monopoly power


THREE BLACK HOLE PIONEERS SHARE NOBEL PRIZE IN PHYSICS FOR 2020




Oct 6, 2020,

What do this year’s winners of the Nobel Prize in Physics have in common (besides winning the Nobel Prize, that is)? All three of this year’s winners — Sir Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, and Andrea Ghez — focused their research on black holes, in the process bringing humanity one step closer to unraveling “The Milky Way’s darkest secret,” according to the Nobel Foundation.

The three newly minted Nobel Laureates split the Physics award two ways, with Penrose being honored individually “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity,” while Genzel and Ghez shared the prize “for the discovery of a supermassive compact object at the centre of our galaxy” — an object that, you guessed it, can only be explained by current research as nothing other than a black hole.


#VELIKOVSKY WAS RIGHT

A former colleague of the late Stephen Hawking (Penrose even penned Hawking’s 2018 obituary for The Guardian), Penrose’s work to link black holes with Einstein’s general theory of relativity dates all the way back to his work with Hawking in the 1960s. But it was his use of “ingenious mathematical methods in his proof that black holes are a direct consequence of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity” that earned him his first Nobel prize in 2020, more than three decades after sharing the Wolf Foundation Prize for Physics with Hawking in 1988.

Along with Hawking and a handful of other physicists of the post-Einstein generation, Penrose is responsible for much of the current scientific consensus that describes and speculates on the way that black holes form and behave. In 2018, he theorized that other “dead” universes may very well predate our own, interpreting Cosmic Microwave Background radiation data to suggest that faint signatures of those older universes’ dead black holes still linger from the cosmic event that created this one.

The Nobel Foundation recognized Genzel and Ghez jointly for positing that the center of the Milky Way is anchored by a supermassive unseen object. “Their pioneering work has given us the most convincing evidence yet of a supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way,” according to the Nobel Foundation.

Each physicist leads “a group of astronomers that, since the early 1990s, has focused on a region called Sagittarius A* at the centre of our galaxy,” the Foundation explained. “The orbits of the brightest stars closest to the middle of the Milky Way have been mapped with increasing precision. The measurements of these two groups agree, with both finding an extremely heavy, invisible object that pulls on the jumble of stars, causing them to rush around at dizzying speeds…Stretching the limits of technology, they refined new techniques to compensate for [telescopic] distortions caused by the Earth’s atmosphere, building unique instruments and committing themselves to long-term research.”

It might have taken decades for each scientist to earn the prize, but they’d likely be the first to acknowledge that, in the grand scheme of things, that’s less than a nano-blip on the boundless cosmic clock. It just goes to show that, when it comes to answering questions that may be older than the universe itself, persistence pays off. “The discoveries of this year’s Laureates have broken new ground in the study of compact and supermassive objects,” wrote David Haviland, chair of the Nobel Committee for Physics. “But these exotic objects still pose many questions that beg for answers and motivate future research.”

Sounds like a pep talk to start thinking about a STEM career. Or, if you already happen to be a Nobel Laureate, to roll up your sleeves and get right back to work.
OPINION FROM GERMANY
Trump's tactics are working

Much of the world has been appalled by the behavior of US President Donald Trump since he was diagnosed with COVID-19. But his supporters love it, writes DW's Ines Pohl from the state of Ohio.


"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn't lose any voters," Trump boasted notoriously at the beginning of the 2016 election campaign.

The president hasn't yet shot anyone in New York, but his recent reckless behavior after testing positive for the coronavirus comes pretty close.

After two days in hospital and at a time when he was almost certainly still contagious, he got into the back of his black presidential limo, nicknamed "The Beast," and put his security staff at risk in order to drive by his fans. Wearing a black mask and an open shirt, he smiled and waved victoriously.

The next day, he returned to the White House and removed his mask triumphantly at the top of the steps leading to the White house balcony as he posed for the cameras. "Don’t be afraid of Covid," he had tweeted before leaving the hospital. "Don’t let it dominate your life."

He said that he was "feeling great," with the underlying suggestion being that the virus was not the potential threat to life that his political rivals depicted it as.

Read more: Donald Trump has a coronavirus infection: What happens next?
Far-reaching Supreme Court decision

From across the Atlantic, one might think that Trump's recent behavior alone would be enough to ensure that he does not win the upcoming election. But here on the ground, that is not so obvious.

To understand US voters, one has to remember, among other things, the importance of the president's role in nominating Supreme Court justices, who have life tenure and can determine the country's political direction for decades to come. Their influence can be much more powerful and lasting than that of a president, who is in office for a maximum of eight years, two of which at least tend to be spent on the campaign trail.

In addition, some 25% of US voters are opposed to women having the right to an abortion. They do not care what presidents do or say so long as they fight against this right. Although Trump has been known to change course and backtrack often, he has been unwavering when it comes to this issue.

He has also been unwavering with regard to generous tax breaks benefiting the upper-middle classes and the super-rich, who already have plenty — but seem to need more.

Read more: US: Donald Trump halts coronavirus stimulus talks until after election

So-called pro-lifers, or anti-abortion activists, are some of President Trump's most vocal supporters

A defender of white America

Then there are the many Americans who didn't really know where they belonged in a country whose current white majority will likely be a minority in less than 25 years' time. But that was before Trump arrived on the scene as a political outsider and successor to the first Black president in US history. He has capitalized on racist fears, seeming to stand as a guarantee for the preservation of white America, among other things through his curbs on immigration and an apparent reluctance to condemn white supremacist movements. He also appealed to working-class whites by promising to bring back jobs that had been outsourced to other countries and to restore former industrial hubs to their past glory.

Such supporters were shocked when their superhero caught the virus and seemed to falter. And Trump's reckless behavior was part of a grand strategy to reassure them that all is well — he needs their unflinching support if he is to have any chance of being reelected. And his tactics have worked.

Read more: White House COVID-19 outbreak widens, as cases mount

Trump's election to lose

As for the others — such as Black people whose relatives have died because they did not have access to the same medical treatment as Trump or those who cannot fathom why the president has still not made it mandatory to wear masks nationwide — he simply doesn't care, because he knows that he cannot win them over.

This might all seem completely crazy from a distance. But it is apparent that Donald Trump's tactics are working among large swaths of the US public. No matter what happens, as long as he stays healthy enough to keep up his little games, Trump's supporters will continue to root for him.

What will be decisive in the end is whether Trump's behavior will motivate enough people to vote him out of the Oval Office, as Joe Biden on his own is not attractive enough to draw undecided Democrats and unwilling voters to the polling stations.

This article was translated from German.

Ines Pohl, US correspondent for DW
China furious with global outcry over Xinjiang and Hong Kong

Beijing is angry after many countries supported a Germany-led initiative to condemn rights violations in the country. UN diplomats told DW that China's pressure tactics have failed, at least this time around.



In the declaration drafted by Germany and presented at the UN General Assembly in New York on Tuesday, 39 predominantly Western countries denounced China for gross human rights violations in the western Chinese province of Xinjiang and the autonomous region of Tibet, and for limiting political and personal freedoms in Hong Kong.

In the statement endorsed by the UK, the US and many EU countries, Germany's ambassador to the UN, Christoph Heusgen, decried the "widespread surveillance [that] disproportionately continues to target Uighur and other minorities" as well as "forced labor and forced birth control including sterilization." He also criticized the existence of political re-education camps in Xinjiang, where more than a million people had reportedly been detained.

Regarding Hong Kong, the German ambassador expressed "deep concerns" about elements of the recently enacted national security law, which allowed for certain cases to be transferred for prosecution to mainland China. He also demanded that Beijing ensure "freedoms of speech, press and assembly."

An angry response


China's ambassador to the UN, Zhang Jun, responded with an irate statement, saying the accusations were "groundless" and that his country "opposes interference in internal affairs." In separate statements, Pakistan and Cuba voiced their support for Beijing's position, as did a group of mainly African and Arab countries, Russia and Venezuela.

Beijing's anger was in part due to the fact that it had not anticipated such a surge in support for the declaration, according to a diplomat who spoke to DW on condition of anonymity.

Other officials, who also wished to remain unnamed, told DW that Beijing had not expected more than 30 countries to join and had begun a political pressure campaign to prevent countries from signing the statement.

In the end, 39 countries signed on to the declaration, 16 more than last year, with Bosnia and Herzegovina joining literally at the last minute. This was the result of weeks of lobbying by diplomats from Germany, the UK and the US, who clandestinely spoke to other UN states asking for their support. The list remained classified until minutes before Germany's UN ambassador Heusgen read the statement in New York, for fear signatories might be poached by China at the last moment.

Let's be friends, or else

China is known to play hardball with countries that it thinks are planning to sign on to international statements criticizing its activities. "Countries do report to us a significant amount of pressure, including threats around economic cooperation from China if support is not given", British Ambassador to the UN, Jonathan Allen, said in a press conference after Tuesday's UN meeting.

In 2019, for example, Beijing threatened to thwart Austria's attempts to find a new location for its embassy in the Chinese capital if it signed a declaration condemning the Asian superpower's human rights violations. Vienna signed the statement anyway, but another European signatory was cut off from Chinese economic support after endorsing the declaration.

On another occasion, Lebanon was told Beijing would oppose the extension of the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in the country if it didn't side with China, a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

Read more: Why is Germany silent on China's human rights abuses?

Several UN diplomats told DW that they were being hounded by their Chinese counterparts in the run-up to issuing statements critical of the Asian country. One spoke about how aggressively she was pursued by a diplomat from Beijing. "They're in your face all the time," she said. "They call you, they text you, in the evenings, on the weekends, it's incessant."

One time, she recalls her Chinese counterparts deliberately creating a situation to intimidate her. "They would gang up on me, ask me to come outside where more of their colleagues were waiting, it was a three-on-one situation and they were really aggressive."

Several other diplomats, who wished to remain unnamed, told DW that Chinese embassy staff had, on various occasions, presented them with false information about what their superiors had allegedly agreed to, to wrest compliance.

DW reached out to the Chinese mission in the UN for comment, but is yet to receive a response.

Might is right

"Some countries are happy to be on China's side, like Russia, Syria, Cuba or Venezuela," Lou Charbonneau, United Nations director at Human Rights Watch (HRW), told DW, adding, "Others endorse China's position only because of fear of repercussions."

Indeed, China's aggressive tactics seem to work sometimes. Last year, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia supported a delicately formulated statement delivered by Kuwait, in which it spoke out in favor of human rights, but was careful not to antagonize China. This year, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain showed up with a similar announcement.

Read more: Are EU-China trade relations at a crossroads?

But Tuesday's UN statement shows that Beijing's tactics may be backfiring. In German ambassador Christoph Heusgen's words, "More and more countries are feeling increasingly uncomfortable with China."

However, Chinese influence is growing in poorer countries, like those in Africa, or in European countries like Greece, where it continues to invest heavily. This may have an impact on garnering international support against rights violations in the country.

But HRW's Charbonneau believes this strategy won't pay off in the long run and the number of countries critical of China over the country's human rights record will keep going up. "The more countries speak out, the more others feel they can do the same," he said.

"With every one of these statements and with every country that signs on to them, the political costs for China's non-compliance with international norms go up," Charbonneau underlined. "If they want to be part of the international community, they need to change."

DW RECOMMENDS


HRW says China poses 'dire' threat to human rights

Human Rights Watch has said that China is taking measures that will weaken systems protecting human rights around the world. The NGO's annual review was launched in New York after its director was barred from Hong Kong.


EU pushes China on trade, human rights at virtual summit

EU officials have called on Beijing to respect human rights and open its markets, saying they are fundamental requirements of the EU-Chinese relationship. The German Chancellor said it is high time to demand reciprocity.


China: Uighur women reportedly sterilized in attempt to suppress population

Two Uighur majority counties in Xinjiang province reportedly planned to sterilize between 14% and 34% of women aged between 18 and 49. Politicians around the world are calling on the UN to investigate the claims.



Should Germany import hydrogen or produce it at home?

As Germany plans a pathway to a low-carbon economy, experts argue over whether to replace its huge fossil hydrocarbon imports with imported renewable hydrogen or instead rely entirely on hydrogen made in Germany.




Jörg Steinbach, 64, is the minister for economy, jobs and energy for the state of Brandenburg, the region that surrounds — but does not include — the city of Berlin. Before that, Steinbach, a chemical engineer, spent eight years as president of technical universities in both Brandenburg and Berlin. This autumn, Brandenburg is developing a new hydrogen strategy under his enthusiastic direction.

"Hydrogen is going to be a major feature of the low-carbon clean energy economy we need to build in coming years. It will have multiple roles: powering heavy vehicles, ships, trains, eventually perhaps aircraft as well. It can replace natural gas for heating. It can replace coal in steelmaking," Steinbach told DW.

Read more: Why all the fuss about hydrogen?

Steinbach said in Germany, clean energy will be supplied primarily in two forms: First, electricity produced from wind and solar power, and second, hydrogen gas produced by using renewable electricity to split water into oxygen and hydrogen.

Hydrogen is thus a way of storing energy, an "energy carrier," and not a primary energy source.

Since taking office in 2018, Steinbach has been pushing for his state to become a clean technology leader — and with a gigantic new Tesla Gigafactory under construction on the outskirts of Grünheide, a village in Brandenburg southeast of central Berlin, he's off to a pretty good start.

Steinbach: 'Hydrogen is going to be a major feature of the low-carbon clean energy economy'

A slew of regions vied for the privilege of hosting the first Tesla electric car factory in continental Europe. Brandenburg won the prize, helped along by the fact that Elon Musk, Tesla's hard-charging CEO, has a high regard for German engineering. He has often said that he loves Germany in general, and Berlin in particular. And now Tesla's initial investment in Germany is leading the company to make additional investments in other technologies as well.

Hydrogen strategies in the making

Steinbach grinned when asked if he hopes to persuade additional clean technology companies to set up giant factories in Brandenburg, but he was cagey about details. "Our work on the hydrogen strategy is early stage. We're looking at a variety of applications," he told DW.

Germany is interested in powering locomotives with hydrogen fuel cells on rail lines that are not yet electrified, and is supporting the development of new hydrogen fuel cell-powered motors for powering heavy trucks. Renewable hydrogen will play a growing role as a feedstock for the chemical industry in the future and is expected to gradually replace coking coal in steelmaking, as well. There are even hydrogen-powered aircraft in development, though it will take many years before they're commercially available.

Hydrogen can also be pumped into existing natural gas pipelines and used for heating buildings — though the differing characteristics of hydrogen compared to methane, the main component of natural gas, means there are limits to how much hydrogen can be added to the existing gas network without causing technical problems. But "those problems can be solved by replacing some of the equipment," Steinbach said.

The state of Brandenburg isn't the only place that has a hydrogen strategy under development. Germany as a whole also has one, and so does the European Union. A key question for Germany and Europe is where hydrogen will come from in a zero-emissions future. Will it be domestically produced, or imported from overseas?

The likely answer: both. Peter Altmaier, Germany's minister of economy and energy, has supported hydrogen imports as well as domestic production.

E-fuels from the wind and sun

Jörg Steinbach told DW that he isn't particularly keen on seeing Germany import hydrogen. He wants it produced domestically. A key question, however, is whether Germans will balk at seeing many more wind turbines and solar panel fields set up to supply the huge amounts of additional electricity that will be needed as the car fleet and the building heating sector increasingly electrify over the coming two decades.

There is an alternative. In the mid-2000s, a research group at Germany's aerospace agency, DLR, calculated that covering the equivalent of 1% of the area of the Sahara desert with solar thermal power arrays would generate enough electricity to supply energy to the entire world, for all purposes. A consortium of German companies launched a project called Desertec to pursue the vision.

Read more: Could Morocco's megaplant revive dreams of Saharan solar?


Can Germans live with all the solar panels needed to supply the huge amounts of additional electricity?

But over the years, the price of solar photovoltaic panels has dropped so dramatically that installing solar panels in Germany has become cheaper than importing solar power from North Africa, despite the Germany's cloudier skies — producing domestic solar power doesn't require building long-distance transmission lines. The Desertec project has since faded from view.

Michael Sterner, an engineering professor in Bavaria who is an expert on "power-to-gas systems" for making clean hydrogen from renewable energy and water, believes Germany will eventually need to import clean energy from overseas, especially in the form of synthetic liquid fuels.

"It makes more sense to initially produce hydrogen regionally, as the state of Brandenburg intends to do. Value creation and jobs are created locally — the circular economy is strengthened," Sterner told DW. "However, I think we will also need to import hydrogen, or low-carbon liquid fuels made from it."

Sterner noted that Germany currently imports around two-thirds of its primary energy supply, nearly all of it in the form of fossil fuels, and so "if we develop green technologies for export and then import green energy produced with that equipment, that's a win-win for everyone — that trade reduces our export surplus, and is more sustainable than the old fossil fuels system."

By green technologies, Sterner means, for example, factories and machine tools for fabricating photovoltaic cells and panels or wind turbines; equipment for large-scale electrolysis of water to make hydrogen gas; and Fischer-Tropsch factories for making synthetic liquid hydrocarbons using renewable electricity as the energy input.

VIDEO